LexSimple trading as Lawba
5 day sprint to create a platform that allows legal design to a broader audience without the cost of a bespoke legal design price tag.
UX Designer
Sian Brown (Owner) Lauren Dixon (Sprint Facilitator)
2021
LexSimple began as an idea to bring the concepts of legal design to a broader audience without the cost of a bespoke legal design price tag.
Team:
- Founder
- Legal technology lawyer
- Government website copywriter
- Digital marketing specialists
- User Experience Designer
- Sprint Facilitator
Summary: We clearly defined the problem we wanted to solve, got inspired by excellent products solving a similar problem in other contexts, drew six concepts and then selected and mapped the LexSimple prototype.
Making the complex simple
We tested this prototype with users: a small business owner who would use it to prepare contracts with his oil and gas industry clients, a social enterprise in-house counsel who would use it to create legal documents that reflected their brand, and an accountant who would use it to draft documents to cut down on the back and forth with the legal department.
Overall, the users validated the core concept for LexSimple and were inspired with many ideas on how LexSimple could transform the way they produce legal documents.
User testing validated LexSimple could transform how businesses of all sizes draft and use their legal documents
Our UX prototype illustrated the workflow to prepare a service agreement.
Overall, the users validated the core concept for LexSimple and were inspired with many ideas on how LexSimple could transform the way they produce legal documents by:
● speeding up the drafting process, ● making clear the overall balance of benefits in a contract and ● making legal documents a part of their brand instead of a boring necessity
100% of participants were able to successfully complete all tasks.
66% of participants felt trust the legal document produced was legally sound
100% of participants would using this product in their current role.
100% of users identified the product would provide a differentiated
Problems
Can we create a product that helps users apply and benefit from the concepts of legal design?
Can we produce more user friendly documents than traditional legal services / templating tools?
Can we create a platform that does not create more confusion in the process?
We set out to answer these questions, which were all validated with a resounding yes
Prototype
User Testing
- Overall Concept
- Service Agreement Workflow
- Design-led Service Agreement
- Overall Concept
Users overall liked the product and could identify points of differentiation between LexSimple and other legal templating solutions like Lawpath or enterprise tools.
100% of participants were able to successfully complete all tasks.
100% of participants found the testimonial on the landing page increased trust
100% of participants would using this product in their current role.
100% of users identified the product would provide a differentiated experience
“I really like it. I was looking for something like this before. Right now there’s nothing in between getting a lawyer and doing an online template”
“Where I see simple, I worry. There’s simple and there’s clear. We don’t want simplicity to detract from clarity. Simplicity may convey it’s missing things but users want the full spectrum of options and outcomes.”
- Service Agreement Workflow
Users found the workflow simple, but wanted more guidance to increase confidence that all relevant terms were included and that they understood how their agreement compared to the market.
100% of participants were able to successfully complete all tasks.
33% of participants had difficulty finding the next step after drafting.
66% of participants suggested additional guidance they wanted from the platform
“My company uses 30 different platforms for drafting, signing and storing legal documents. I don’t want to go in and out of different platforms for different stages. Having it all in one is easier”
“The question UI could be more engaging like I want to fill it out. Some UI’s that make you want to do something even if you don’t initially want to spend the time on it or it seems boring.”
Recommendations:
Strategic
Continue with template-completion style tool: Users validated that a template-completion experience met their needs in this space.
● Prioritise trust-building in features and marketing: Non-legal users needed more comfort that design-led document protected them legally. Legal users knew it was sound. ● Use the platform to educate users: Users saw an opportunity for the platform to increase their legal acumen through built in guidance. ● Branded legal documents is a key selling point: Users recognised this tool could turn their documents from boring to a key part of their brand.
Features
Option-based editing feature: During document editing, provide users with 3 options for a particular term (e.g. payment days; indemnity clause; notice periods; etc) and include insights about which options are most frequently used by similar users.
● Agreement summaries: Users wanted to see which party was favoured by each clause and a summary of who the agreement favoured or if it was balanced. ● Commenting and collaboration: Users wanted to collaborate on the document with colleagues and counterparties with commenting.